Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I will agree D.C. probably does do Indian a bit better than LA and quite well overall. Probably should have been on my original list.
And though I agree that the Peruvian and Salvadoran food in DC is good, I'm not sure it's better than LA.
I didn't particularly mean to imply that D.C. is a bad food city, but compared to LA it's overmatched. DC doesn't seem to have the same culinary breadth as places like LA, NYC, Houston, Chicago, SF etc. With that being said it does seem to be a better food city than places like Philly, DFW, Boston and the like.
So maybe D.C. is right where it should be food-wise..
Agree with this except for Philly. Philly is fantastic for dining and Philly restauranteurs have played a large part in DC's improvement.
Agree with this except for Philly. Philly is fantastic for dining and Philly restauranteurs have played a large part in DC's improvement.
I lived in DC for 4 years back in the 90's and ate out a lot. I loved Washington, it's such a beautiful city. When I left they were just starting to experience a more vibrant food scene. Back then, compared to LA, the food scene in DC lacked a lot of diversity. I imagine all of that has changed now and things have only gotten better.
Opinions are like armpits. Everybody has them. The difference is people who work at Bon Apetit, Zagat, or Michelin etc. are the only ones that matter. They can make restaurants raving international sensations overnight. That's the business and their opinion brings 3-month long reservation waits and block long lines to get a seat.
Most of you still don't get it do you? Their opinions are the only ones that matter.
Only if you need other people to tell you how to think and what to like.
This remindes me of a Chinese hole in the wall in SF. People would stand in lines a block long, to eat mediocre Chinese food, and enjoy the novelty of surly service.
Only if you need other people to tell you how to think and what to like.
This remindes me of a Chinese hole in the wall in SF. People would stand in lines a block long, to eat mediocre Chinese food, and enjoy the novelty of surly service.
Like weiner circle in Chicago.
Hype doesn't make things good.
Just like the people who wait 4 hours for bbq at Franklin in Austin.
I lived in DC for 4 years back in the 90's and ate out a lot. I loved Washington, it's such a beautiful city. When I left they were just starting to experience a more vibrant food scene. Back then, compared to LA, the food scene in DC lacked a lot of diversity. I imagine all of that has changed now and things have only gotten better.
Yes, I agree DC seems to have gotten much better in the last few years and part of all the awards for DC recently has to do with recognition of things having gotten much better. That being said, LA is still much better overall when it comes to food. Except for the extreme high-end, LA is probably the overall best food city in the nation.
Just because that specific guide doesn’t operate in LA doesn’t mean that there isn’t fantastic higher end restaurants in Los Angeles. The Michelin Guide is a latecomer to the US and (outside of France and Europe), but that means nothing in terms of what was available. Certainly most entries are good when they are within the area they do listings, but that’s not very useful when the guide simply isn’t established in a comparison city.
DC’s restaurant scene has vastly expanded, but I’d have a hard time believing that it at any price point really does a favorable comparison to LA.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,558,075 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
Just because that specific guide doesn’t operate in LA doesn’t mean that there isn’t fantastic higher end restaurants in Los Angeles. The Michelin Guide is a latecomer to the US and (outside of France and Europe), but that means nothing in terms of what was available. Certainly most entries are good when they are within the area they do listings, but that’s not very useful when the guide simply isn’t established in a comparison city.
DC’s restaurant scene has vastly expanded, but I’d have a hard time believing that it at any price point really does a favorable comparison to LA.
Right, but the problem is to my understanding, LA previously had a Michelin guide until they pulled it. I'm not sure as to the reason why, but why didn't they pull SF's or Chicago's and then go ahead and add DC?
As I have stated before, on pure size alone LA basically crushes most US cities on food, but it's just interesting to see LA be claimed as the food capitol of the US or maybe even the world and have a Michelin guide pulled from them.
Right, but the problem is to my understanding, LA previously had a Michelin guide until they pulled it. I'm not sure as to the reason why, but why didn't they pull SF's or Chicago's and then go ahead and add DC?
As I have stated before, on pure size alone LA basically crushes most US cities on food, but it's just interesting to see LA be claimed as the food capitol of the US or maybe even the world and have a Michelin guide pulled from them.
New York City is #1 in food
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
